I have consulted and developed patient engagement/population health technology for for over 10 years, and David Carr is spot on with this article.

POPULATION HEALTH is...

I Back office Infrastructure:

EHR- Analytics

Risk Stratification

Define populations

II Front End Outreach/Measurement:

Engage and Monitor Patients

Manage Care of Populations

Measure Outcomes & Satisfaction

Close Gaps & Improve Care

Phase I does not improve health without Phase II, and there are 3 technology options to remotely engage, monitor, and measure the outcomes of a specific population (I am speaking of chronic populations, the target of healthcare reform, not every individual in geographical region)

1 Voice -automated, interactive

2 Data- Email/Text

3 Video

We chose a hybrid 'voice' technology on the front end, data on the back(provider) end, because both the size, and characteristics of most 'at risk' populations (elderly) necessitates quick and easy to use, anywhere, for scalability. We determined video, while a good technology, was too intrusive for most, and the special hardware, software, and WiFi was needed, limit it's use to much smaller populations.

Your are confusing a type of chronic care management with population health. The best definition of "population health management" is the one from Prof. D. Kindig and it is quoted widely in the book on "Population Health" edited by David Nash et al.

Also, except in a few places like Joslyn, most chronic patients are treated singly and NOT in groups.

Conversations about population health management often start with talking about "groups of people" like diabetics -- by far, the most commonly used example -- who are subject to similar ills and need to be tracked and coached in similar ways to keep their conditions from deteriorating. Yes, I agree that part of the point is to go beyond what medications they're taking (or failing to take) and look at lifestyle choices that are as or more important in whether they stay relatively healthy.

Diabetes is a focused, practical example, but the longer range vision is of managing the health of entire populations -- maybe not everybody in the community but everyone included in an accountable care organization or other structure where the incentives are oriented to keeping everyone healthier. At this point, that may just be a dream -- really active care management programs are still too expensive to apply to everyone, and the chronic disease sufferers make sense to focus on first.

Let's make sure we understand what "population health" means. It is not managing the health of populations. The term was used because many of the factors that affect the health of chronic patients lay beyond the scope of health care and they are known as "social determinants." Access to care, availability of open spaces to exercise are some of the examples of social determinants and these factors to gether with the health care factors of treatments etc. are collectively referred to as "population health".

As Dr. Dave Kindig of the University of Wisconsin has pointed out in one of his blogs, managing these elements of "population health (he even has an oft quoted diagram describing this) is not easy at all. How do you rate availability of "nutritious food", or value of bicycle paths in a quantitative manner. Yet, that is what is needed for population health management.

I think the author is really referring to managing the health of "groups of people" with similar health issues. Even with this restricted definition there is a serious problem. What is a metric for determining health of populations? Without such a metric you cannot even say whether the health of a group of people is improving or not. Even if you had lab data available how do you compare populations with thousands of individuals when there are two or more items in the data set for each person?

I have had to develop a completely new and patented method to accomplish this. It wasn't easy and it took over 6 years for a team of programmers to complete the work. We are currently analyzing the Medicaid population in a state to understand disease burdens and their trends.

A well-researched article highlighting the need for technology in the healthcare industry. Treading on these lines Summit Planners Technology of Singapore offers the medical & clinic software which has a proven track record of considerably improving the overall patient care in a clinic or hospital. Its host of cloud-based modules have simplified the operations & administrative functions of a medical office as well.

Great article regarding the need for more proactive technology. SILVERSPHERE has this same focus in helping caregivers take a more proactive approach. Babyboomers are more savvy and aware than the generations before them. We need to provide them and the people that take care of them with the tools to maintain or improve their quality of life safely in whatever setting they call home.

In today's technology-driven world, "innovation" has become a basic expectation. IT leaders are tasked with making technical magic, improving customer experience, and boosting the bottom line -- yet often without any increase to the IT budget. How are organizations striking the balance between new initiatives and cost control? Download our report to learn about the biggest challenges and how savvy IT executives are overcoming them.

Is DevOps helping organizations reduce costs and time-to-market for software releases? What's getting in the way of DevOps adoption? Find out in this InformationWeek and Interop ITX infographic on the state of DevOps in 2017.

Transformation is on every IT organization's to-do list, but effectively transforming IT means a major shift in technology as well as business models and culture. In this IT Trend Report, we examine some of the misconceptions of digital transformation and look at steps you can take to succeed technically and culturally.